MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288727221 · doi:10.56748/ejse.9117

Bond Strength of FRP Laminates to Concrete: State-of-the-Art Review

2009· article· en· W2288727221 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Journal of Structural Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryRead Jones Christoffersen (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticSlabStructural engineeringMaterials scienceFailure mode and effects analysisComposite materialBond strengthStructural failureEngineeringAdhesiveLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rehabilitation of existing infrastructure has become a priority in recent years as an alternative to the daunting costs of rebuilding structures. Traditional repair methods have drawbacks, many of which can be overcome through the use of fibre reinforced polymer FRP laminates. However, the behaviour of FRP rehabilitated structures has yet to be conveniently and accurately modelled in many situations. For example, better understanding of their failure modes will allow for more precise designs that will balance safety andcost. To strengthen an RC beam or slab for flexure, FRP laminates are usually bonded externally on the structural element. A common failure mode encountered in initial tests was the laminate debonding from the surface. Here, the bond strength and modes of debonding between the FRP laminates and reinforced concrete members strengthened in flexure are reviewed. Current models for predicting the bond strength between the laminates and concrete are also scrutinized.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it